What's your view on Zechariah 14?

[Guest]

Zechariah 14 is used by dispensationalists to show that the Lord will put his foot the mount of olives to stop the tribulation. Just wondering what others opinions are.

[Guest]

Tribulation or no tribulation, I believe these Scriptures point to future events related to the second coming of Christ which v4 declares to be "on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem." While it is my view that many "end time" prophecies spoken by Christ and the OT prophets have already been fulfilled; mostly during the period of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, it is a stretch beyond reasonability to assert that ALL prophecies were fulfilled at that time, especially the ones related to Christ's second coming.

I have read some extreme preterist literature that has even suggested that the second coming of Christ was fulfilled in the judgment that befell the nation of Israel in 70 AD. I believe the clearer interpretation of Zechariah 14 suggests future events related to Christ's LITERAL coming to this earth and the establishment of his kingdom on the earth as suggested other places in Scripture such as Isaiah 2.

1 This is what Isaiah son of Amoz saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem:

2 In the last days

the mountain of the LORD's temple will be established
as chief among the mountains;
it will be raised above the hills,
and all nations will stream to it.

3 Many peoples will come and say,

"Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD ,
to the house of the God of Jacob.
He will teach us his ways,
so that we may walk in his paths."
The law will go out from Zion,
the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
4 He will judge between the nations
and will settle disputes for many peoples.
They will beat their swords into plowshares
and their spears into pruning hooks.
Nation will not take up sword against nation,
nor will they train for war anymore.

5 Come, O house of Jacob,
let us walk in the light of the LORD .

To me, this points to a physical coming of Christ to judge the nations and to establish his kingdom on the earth. Though the New Covenant breaks down the covenantal distinction between Jew and Gentile, the nation of Israel still has a unique calling according to God's sovereign will.

Although it is unclear how all of these events will unfold, I do believe, as suggested in Zechariah 12, these prophetic words speak of a time when the nation of Israel will recognize the one they have pierced. Romans 12 also suggests a reconciliation of this wayward nation to God. God's plan for this parcel of land and its inhabitants suggests a future distinction among the nations. It is God's prerogative to chose a nation. Israel's rejection of Christ brought severe consequences, but their reconciliation will restore them to a place of significance. Therefore, the following sample verses from Zechariah 14 speak to me of future events:

9 The LORD will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one LORD , and his name the only name.

12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem:

16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty, and to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.

[Guest]

The thing is, I believe that Christ's first coming was when He established His kingdom on the earth. He literally stood on the earth, said your heart should be on your treasure in heaven (it's above all mountains) and all nations (Gentiles) will stream into it. The Church is also called the house of God in the new testament. And people from all over the world steam into it, knowing the peace of God they no longer make war but harvest souls (John 4:34-38). Yes, there still are and have been Christians who make war, but that's another debate. We are suppose to be at peace with everyone (Rom 12:18) and being born again we do not wage war with weapons of the world but with the Spirit (Eph 6, 2 Cor 10:3-4).

When He comes again He will raise the dead, judge the world, renew creation and then we will dwell in the new Jerusalem in the new heavens and new earth.

I don't see His first coming as an inability to establish His kingdom. And I see the second coming as the day of the Lord, were Jesus is revealed with flaming fire, "raptuing" the saved and destrying the "lost". (2 Peter 3:10-14, 2 Thes 1:5-10)

1 Cor 15:20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those who are Christ's at His coming. 24 Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death.

I see the kingdom (of Saints) being handed over to God after Christ's coming, when death is destroyed. When is death destroyed?

1 Cor 15:50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption. 51 Behold, I tell you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed-- 52 in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet. For the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible has put on incorruption, and this mortal has put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written: "Death is swallowed up in victory."

At the "rapture" is when the dead are raised and death is swallowed up in victory. There is no scenario were I see a future kingdom on the earth before the new heavens and new earth other than the kingdom that exists now.

[Guest]

I still question whether the events described in Zechariah 12 & 14 pertain to Christ's first coming. For example, how are we to interpret the following passages that speak of a judgment against nations, yet a continuance of events on the earth following that judgment?

12:9 On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.

14: 12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem ...

14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty ...

According to John 9:39, among Christ's objectives in his first coming was "For judgment I have come into this world." It is also clear in many passages that at his second coming there will be a judgment against the nations. However, it appears to me that Zechariah 12 & 14 are not speaking of the final judgment before the establishment of the new heaven and the new earth.

[Guest]

I still question whether the events described in Zechariah 12 & 14 pertain to Christ's first coming. For example, how are we to interpret the following passages that speak of a judgment against nations, yet a continuance of events on the earth following that judgment?

12:9 On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.

14: 12 This is the plague with which the LORD will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem ...

14:16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD Almighty ...

According to John 9:39, among Christ's objectives in his first coming was "For judgment I have come into this world." It is also clear in many passages that at his second coming there will be a judgment against the nations. However, it appears to me that Zechariah 12 & 14 are not speaking of the final judgment before the establishment of the new heaven and the new earth.

Yes, I know what you are saying. I'm never too sure of how to interpret these passages.

I see the passages you quoted like this. In John, that you quoted (9:39) I would apply to the Zechariah passages. I would also apply John 3:16-21 to these in the same way.

To put it another way. I see Daniel 2:34-35 as Jesus being the stone that strikes the enemies of God and crushes them like chaff. I see this in the first coming because of what He said and how far the church has grown under great persecution. And Daniel 2:44 I read as being what Christ came to do, set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, and it will crush the other kingdoms.

Jesus said: "You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it".

Jesus also said:
"What then is this that is written:
"The stone which the builders rejected
Has become the chief cornerstone'?
Whoever falls on that stone will be broken; but on whomever it falls, it will grind him to powder.

And 1 Peter 2:4;
Coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected indeed by men, but chosen by God and precious, you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. Therefore it is also contained in the Scripture,

"Behold, I lay in Zion
A chief cornerstone, elect, precious,
And he who believes on Him will by no means be put to shame."
Therefore, to you who believe, He is precious; but to those who are disobedient,
"The stone which the builders rejected Has become the chief cornerstone," and "A stone of stumbling
And a rock of offense."

We are the kingdom that is being built up into a spiritual house of God (Heb 3:6). And when we preach the Gospel, we are defeating the devil and crushing other kingdoms until the earth is filled.

2 Corinthians 10:3; For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as the world does. 4 The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. 5 We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.

So when Jesus comes, he destroys death by resurrecting the dead, and then hands over the kingdom to God. Judgement has passed over those who accepted the Gospel and comes down on those who reject Him.

And 14:16 you quoted I see as converts, people who, like Paul, fought against God's Church until their conversion. Now, since their conversion they worship and obey the King, the Lord Jesus.

[_Steve]

I appreciate the above discussion, and would like to add my two-cents.

Zechariah closes with two distinct prophecies, three chapters long each (9-11 & 12-14). Both are introduced by the unusual phrase "The burden of the word of the Lord" (9:1 & 12:1), which phrase is elsewhere found only at Malachi 1:1.

These two prophecies overlap one another and are somewhat parallel in their fulfillment. Both begin with the conflicts of the Jews with surrounding nations in the intertestamental period (9:1ff & 12:1-9), proceed to describe the coming of the Messiah, or at least the effects of that coming (9:9; 10:8-12 & 12:10-13:9), and then close with reference to the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 (chapters 11 & 14).

While I agree that there are prophecies in the New Testament that forecast the future second coming of Christ (e.g., all of those that predict the resurrection of the dead and the rapture), I don't think it is a stretch to say that no such predictions are found in the Old Testament, and that the burden of Old Testament prophecy ends with the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. This seems to be the implication of Jesus' words in Luke 21:20-23.

I do not pretend that this part of Zechariah presents no difficulties at all. It is, in my judgment, second only to Ezekiel in its presentation of interpretive challenges. However, we are greatly aided in knowing the correct approach to these chapters by the fact that they were so frequently quoted and alluded to by Jesus and the apostles. It can be demonstrated that, whenever these chapters were discussed by New Testament writers, they applied them to the first century, not the twenty-first.

One of the difficulties in seeing a past fulfillment of these chapters is our unfamiliarity with the apocalyptic style in which they were written (the same problem that confuses modern readers of the book of Revelation). In such apocalyptic literature, we find many of the non-literal, stylistic features that are found in these passages. Those features include (but are not limited to) the following:

1) Sometimes ancient (now extinct) nations are named, not representing themselves, but as representative of Gentiles generally (e.g., 10:10);

2) Depictions of miltary conquests, divine interventions and deliverances are sometimes springboards to visions of the Messiah's spiritual victories and deliverance (e.g. Zechariah 9:8-9, where God saving Jerusalem from the havock of Alexander the Great's invasion presages the Messiah, riding on a donkey, bringing salvation to Jerusalem).

3) Political or spiritual upheavals are depicted as earthquakes and other catastrophic natural events--e.g. fountains opening (13:1), mountains splitting forming new valleys (14:4-5), mountains rising and being removed (14:10), rainless droughts (14:17), or heavenly lights being altered (14:6).

4) People are compared to inanimate objects (9:13, 16/ 12:6), to plants or to animals (10:3/11:4ff).

5) Worship of the Messiah is portrayed in the forms familiar to Old Testament readers--e.g. prayer is like offering incense, spiritual sacrifices described in terms of animal sacrifices (14:21), and the Jewish feasts used as types of their spiritual antitypes in the present age (14:16ff).

6) Descriptions of great judgment are stylized and impressionistic, rather than literal (11:1-2, 17/ 14:12), and described as if God personally has come in judgment, even when the event itself is accomplished through normal warfare between nations (14:3, 5 / cf. Isa.19:1).

7) "Jerusalem" and "Zion", depending on context, sometimes refer to the literal city (12:8/ 14:2), and sometimes to the spiritual Jerusalem (14:8, 11, 17), comprised of the faithful Jewish remnant alone.

The common use of hyperbole (emphatic exaggeration) should also be observed (e.g. 12:11-14).

I realize that many will not accept, on the basis of my bare assertion, the premise that these are all non-literal element in the passages, and I have little incentive to convince those who are skeptical. Those most familiar with the language of the Old Testament prophets and of the intertestamental apocalyptic works will have the least difficulty accepting the validity of these observations.

I said that the New Testament writers applied this section of scripture to the first century. I will demonstrate this by several controlling examples:

Zechariah 9:9 is universally accepted by Christians as having its fulfillment on Palm Sunday, which is also confirmed in the New Testament (Matt.21:5).

Zechariah 11:13 is applied by Matthew to the purchase of the potter's field using Judas's blood money (Matt.27:9-10).

Zechariah 12:10 is partly applied to the time when Jesus was pierced with a spear (John 19:37) and the first clause appears to have its fulfillment at Pentecost (Acts 2).

Zechariah 13:7 was quoted by Christ as fulfilled at the time of His arrest in the Garden of Gesthemane (Matt.26:31).

Zechariah 14:8 appears to be the passage that Jesus alluded to ("as the scripture has said") in His declaration at the Feast of Tabernacles. John sees its fulfillment as being Pentecost (John 7:37-39). The fact that Jesus chose the Feast of Tabernacles as the time to make this announcement of fulfillment, no doubt, further connects with the mention of that feast in Zechariah 14:16ff.

Significantly, of the six chapters in this section (Zechariah 9 through 14), five of them are cited in the New Testament. Chapter 10 is the one exception, but there is no reason to separate it from the chronological setting of its surrounding chapters. In fact, many verses in chapter ten point at the same period of redemption (v.8) and spiritual outpouring (v.1). The image of God's people treading down their enemy (v.5) has its fulfillment in our present spiritual warfare (Rom.16:20) and the motif of Israel's exodus from Egypt (vv.10-11) is a common one in the Old Testament prophets as a means of depicting the salvation brought to us by Christ in the present age (Luke 9:31/ 1 Cor.5:7; 10:1-6).

Given the fact that every time the New Testament quotes from this section (Zechariah 9 through 14), it applies the fulfillment to the first century, and never to anything much later, we can say that there is certainly no New Testament authority (nor any other authority) for applying any of it to the time of the future second coming of Christ.

One final observation. Zechariah 14 makes no mention of the Messiah standing on the Mount of Olives. In the passage, it is YAHWEH who stands there (vv.3-4), and while we allow that Jesus is YAHWEH incarnate, there is no reason to place that interpretation on this passage. The concept of YAHWEH standing on that Mount to the east of Jerusalem has its origins in Ezekiel 11:23, where it pictured God as having departed from the midst of Jerusalem to the opposite hillside, so as to leave Jerusalem undefended against the Babylonians who would come and destroy Jerusalem, burn down the temple and take the Jews into captivity. This happened, of course, in 586 BC.

Zechariah predicts the same fate to come on Jerusalem after the Messiah's death (which was mentioned in 13:7) as that which previously was brought about by the Babylonians in Ezekiel's day. Zechariah's prediction refers to the Roman destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70, of course. The two events (586 BC and AD 70) were so similar in detail as to be almost indistinguishable from each other. In both cases, Jerusalem fell to the invaders because YAHWEH had departed, leaving the temple desolate, so that He is seen, in both cases, as if He has left the city and is standing on the nearby mountain (Olivet) to watch the judgment unfold.


It may not be very significant, but I find it interesting that Christ, after announcing the desolation of the temple in His own day (Matt.23:38), left the temple (Matt.24:1) and Jerusalem, and retired to the slopes of Olivet to discuss with the disciples the impending judgment on Jerusalem (Matthew 24:2-34). In so doing, He mimmicked the movements of YAHWEH Himself in Ezekiel 11.

[Guest]

Steve, I am working through some of the passages in regards to Zechariah 14, I am trying to get a better understanding. Thanks for your response in advance if you are able to clarify the following:

You said:
".......The concept of YAHWEH standing on that Mount to the east of Jerusalem has its origins in Ezekiel 11:23, where it pictured God as having departed from the midst of Jerusalem to the opposite hillside, so as to leave Jerusalem undefended against the Babylonians who would come and destroy Jerusalem, burn down the temple and take the Jews into captivity. This happened, of course, in 586 BC. "


Zechariah 14:2-4 says:

Zec 14:2 For I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle, and the city will be captured, the houses plundered, the women ravished and half of the city exiled, but the rest of the people will not be cut off from the city.
Zec 14:3 Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle.
Zec 14:4 In that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, which is in front of Jerusalem on the east; and the Mount of Olives will be split in its middle from east to west by a very large valley, so that half of the mountain will move toward the north and the other half toward the south.
(NASB)

Can you further explain, if God leaves Jerusalem undefended (as you said) then doesn't that conflict with Zech 14:3 which says the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations. How does God leave Jerusalem undefended yet go forth and fight (I would think if you fight against God, you stand no chance).

In addition it was only Babylon that destroyed the Jewish nation in 586BC (you referred to). Zech 14:2 states "all" the nation"s" that come against Jerusalem.

Thanks,
Keith

[_Steve]

Hi Keith,
Thanks for writing about this. I personally believe that verse 3 is parenthetical. Verse 2 describes the destruction of the city and the exile of the Jews in terms that hardly allow any hopes that the city, on this occasion, will be delivered: Half the people are killed, and half go into exile, this only after the city has fallen, its houses plundered and its women raped. Once this has happened, deliverance is a moot point!

As for the reference to "all the nations," this refers to the nations that comprise the Roman Empire and its multinational military force, which destroyed Jerusalem. Previously, when God had abandoned Jerusalem in 586 BC, the prophets spoke of the Babylonian Empire, into which the Jews had been scattered, as "all the nations" (e.g., Jeremiah 29:14, 18; 30:11; 43:5; 46:28).

In the case of Babylon, as in the case of Rome, the prophets speak of a multinational entity as "all the nations". In Zechariah 14:2, "all the nations" cannot mean the Babylonian Empire, which had already fallen in Zechariah's day, and must refer to the Roman Empire, since that is who, subsequently, did all those things that the verse describes.

I believe that verse 4 tells us why Jerusalem's enemies have had the power to do these terrible things to the city: it is because Yawheh has departed from the city (He is standing outside the city, on the Mount of Olives, as He did, over 600 years earlier, in Ezekiel 11), and has left it to the mercy of its enemies (who have no mercy).

As I said, I take verse 3 as a parenthesis: "Then the LORD will go forth and fight against those nations, as when He fights on a day of battle."

"Then" may mean "at the same time" or "sequentially afterward," depending upon context. An example of the second meaning would be seen in a statement like, "Today I must wash the car, then I will go to the post office." "Then," in such a common usage, would not be understood to mean "at the same time," but "afterward."

God's fighting against the nations that destroyed Jerusalem could be seen as fulfilled in the centuries following, which saw the fall of the the empire to the barbarians. The idea that God would use a pagan nation to judge Israel or Judah, and then would turn and judge that pagan nation is not unusual in prophecy (e.g. Isaiah 10:5ff/ Habakkuk 1:6-11; 2:5-19).

It is also possible that God's subsequent war against the nations of Europe refers to His conquering them with the Gospel in the following centuries. This is one way that some interpreters have understood the Rider on the white horse in Revelation 19:11ff, namely, after the fall of Jerusalem, Christ is envisaged as riding forth to conquer the nations with the sword that proceeds from His mouth (His word).

The pagan Roman Empire did, in fact, fall to the influence of Christianity. Emperor Julian the Apostate, who tried to restore paganism after the time of Constantine, acknowledged his failure to do so, before he died, with these words: "You have conquered, O Galilean!"

[Guest]

I think there are good reasons for seeing Zechariah 14 as having an ultimate future application. There has been some great discussion on this topic, especially preterist (70 AD fulfillment) views. I think Steve has made some great points, but I don’t see how they also prevent a futuristic interpretation at least in my paradigm (premill/prewrath).

I can accept much of what Steve is saying, but I’m not willing to let that limit my view on God’s ability to fulfill things in ways I do not expect or better phrased as “in ways the original hearers did not expect”. I prefer to leave the question open, acknowledging spiritual alignments with events but also expecting literal fulfillments as in the case of Zechariah 14:9 which walks, talks and smells like a passage on a literal theocratic rule of Christ. This term Millennium or Millennial rule is only used once in Rev 20:4, but the concept of a literal theocratic rule on earth is found in many other places in the Bible. It’s just that a preterist or amill/no-mill/realizied-mill view finds no purpose for a period after our age and the eternal state while I do.

Just as we don’t have a lot of information about the age of man that preceded us (the antediluvian world / pre-Flood world), we don’t have a lot of information about the age to follow. The reason is that we already have what we need to know to live in this age for Him. Again, that just points out that the debates on eschatology are to be friendly and respectful since our salvation is based on what Christ accomplished already.

The purpose of the theocratic earthly age (a.k.a. Millennium) is a beautiful mirror what God is doing to redeem mankind. When Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden, God cursed creation because of their sin. If man was “broken”, so would be creation (Genesis 3:17). Man was created to be in the Creation. Creation (our universe) provided the prefect environment for His creation of man on the earth filled with all its life placed within the surrounding testimony of God’s love seen in the stars and galaxies. Thus a cursed creation provides for us an object lesion of the consequences of sin.

Even though man was kicked out of the Garden, they still lived in an ideal setting. Many creationist have written on what the earth may have been like before the global Flood and before any rain as wonderful greenhouse where everything was lush and beautiful. But even in this beautiful environment the thoughts of men were only on evil. Thus God destroyed the men and the earth save Noah and crew. The post Flood world is the world we know today. It is as marred and craggy as the sins of man had become before the Flood. Their propensity towards evil led to not only a cursed creation but now a marred creation.

God then moved to provide a means for redemption beginning with men. Jesus now lives in the hearts/lives/homes of men who accept His provision and covering. Now the pattern is that we are saved but yet practically sinners some day we will be glorified. This is the same redemptive pattern for creation so that we can see consequences of sin and redemption. Creation’s current fallen and marred state is like man’s state before Christ. Someday Christ will invade the heart of creation and rule from the heart of creation just has he rules from the hearts of men’s hearts today. Creation will be restored to a more ideal form during Christ’s rule when the healing waters restore it after the global judgments of the bowls (the Second Global Judgment). The earth will be so messed up because of man’s evil ways, that God will have to step in just to save it. It’s the simple orderly picture we get in Revelation. Jesus as the second Adam type is bringing it back. Just as we become glorified, so will creation as the end of the theocratic reign on the fallen but greatly improved earth. Just as we can live and see God’s perfect, 100% holiness in our fallen, yet redeemed flesh, the theocratic world will also not be able to stand; the fallen universe must dissolve in the presence of God’s complete holiness revealed (Rev. 20:11).

This pattern as I’ve said is meant to be an object lesson to us, one we can mull over and appreciate in increasing greatness from the perspective of the Eternal State. In regards to Zechariah 14:3, I can understand how it can be looked as a parenthesis in the discussion and yet, in my view I can still take it literally. But then, as has been said, these passage do tend to be somewhat ambiguous and we shouldn’t be developing our End Times views/ doctrine/ paradigm or whatever off of passages like this but rather seek to find the truth in the explicit and understand passages like Zechariah 14 in light of the clearer teachings and passages. So I wouldn’t give up on your futuristic allowance for the understanding of these passages and allow for even greater fulfillments than what we may even expect or imagine.

[_Steve]

Hi Cameron,
Thanks for sharing these thoughts. I find myself in full sympathy with much of what you have said, though with some modifications:

1) I am not sure that I see as much in Zechariah 14 as you do that walks, talks and looks like a theocratic political kingdom. I suppose the verses that could sound the most that way would be verses 9-11 and verses 16-20. However, since there are a number of other Old Testament passages that provide similar wording or imagery, but which the New Testament writers understood as having a spiritual fulfillment in the present age, I don't feel compelled to impose a more literal hermeneutic on this passage than on those ones.

For examples of similar passages spiritualized in the New Testament, consider the following:
Isaiah 2:1-4 (alluded to in Hebrews 12:22-23);
Isaiah 9:1-7 (cited in Matt.4:12-17);
Isaiah 11 (cited in Romans 15:10);
Isaiah 35 (alluded to in Matt.11:1-6 and Heb.12:12);
Jeremiah 30-33 (cited in Matt.2:17f and alluded to in Luke 22:20/ Heb.8:7-13);
Ezekiel 34 and 37 (alluded to in John 10:11, 14/ Hebrews 13:20);
Joel 2:28-3:21 (cited in Acts 2:16-21);
Amos 9:11ff (cited in Acts 15:14-17);
Zechariah 14:8; Ezek.47:1ff; Joel 3:18 (alluded to in John 7:37-39)

This is a fair sampling of Old Testament passages that walk, talk and look like they are describing a theocratic kingdom on earth, but which were, in every case, applied to the present age and the spiritual kingdom (Rom.14:17) in the apostolic teaching. Jesus similarly spiritualized Malachi 4:5-6. He said "if you are willing to receive it, [John] is Elijah who is to come" (Matt.11:14). "If you are willing to receive it," (the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God--1 Cor.2:14), these prophecies have a spiritual, not literal, fulfillment, just as Malachi 4:5-6 has. The apostles saw this and declared it. Premillennialists still struggle with it...I know, because I was one of them for many years.

2) It does not seem consistent to make this a description of a millennial age in which (we are told elsewhere, in passages popularly applied to the millennium) "they shall not learn war any more." In this passage, there is ongoing war (vv.13-15).

3) I agree that the restoration of a pristine, unfallen creation is in God's plans. I think there is a description of that restored creation in Revelation 21-22 (though, probably, in symbolic language). But these chapters do not coincide with the period described in Revelation 20, but follow it. Revelation 21:1, with its mention that "the first heaven and the first earth had passed away," clearly describes a time following Revelation 20:11, "from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away."

Thus the condition in which "there shall be no more curse" (Rev.22:3) is not the same period as that described in the "millennial" passage of Rev.20. The restored creation will not be for 1000 years, but for ever. The Apostles Paul and Peter both placed this new creation at the second coming of Christ and the resurrection (Rom.8:21-23/ 2 Peter 3:10-13). It is significant to the interpretation of Revelation 20 and the subject of the millennium, to note that the event found at the end of Rev.20 is identified as the second coming of Christ by these apostles. Premillennialism places the second coming at the beginning of Rev.20. This seems to create a conflict between millennialism and the apostolic writings.